Janus

"What is PBS?" Ah, that is better. Submissive and relevant inquiry.

Race?

Beautiful horses aren't they?

“An accusation frequently leveled against the ancient Druids is that they practiced human sacrifice. There is, however, little evidence to support this view. That the Celts, as a race, believed in the willing sacrifice of a life for the good of the people is incontrovertible, but it is often forgotten that such sacrifices were made willingly and were not coerced.” The Druid Source Book, from the intro by John Matthews Boundless joy “No greater love.” The more complicated ones models are the more miserable one is, the more upon the metal platform where Sri Jiva contends that logic is incapable of providing conclusive evidence of the truth. I was not however invoking but the most trivial appeal to your reasoning, not claiming that all British in India were thought themselves more civilized than the Hindus. I am sure that there must have been one or two that went native and had to be hospitalized, or a couple more that went off to be Kings or Queens of Siam or Afghanistran. Heavens no. All the sane British knew that they were more civilized than the Hindus. When your conditioned your conditioned by your society, by the vision of reality that it plants within our own tiny brains. There is simply no other way to look at things, any, none. The delusion is complete and reinforced by everyone around you. You cannot legislate away bigotry or small mindedness, greed, hostility or any demoniac quality, be ye Imperius Rex or the Virgin Queen. Christian claimants that they viewed the Hindus with “equal vision” did not mean to them that they were robbing the AmerIndians of their spiritual heritage by taking their children away from them and placing them in boarding schools where the merest utterance of the Great Spirits name in your Native Laguage was cause for a severe whipping. No, they did not see with equal vision but from an imagined platform of superiority. Stealing the Crown Jewels is just another thing, cattle raiding is part of their heritage. But that darned technology stood in their way of just relating to the Hindu mano e mano. Then there were the dark ages, what was the cause of that? Nearest I can figure is the second law of thermodynamics, after Rome, continued merrily on it’s way. Cartesian split me eye. Mental entropy. Hundreds of years of it, and then boom, boom, boom, up to the Age of Reason, to Bacon, Descartes, Newton Locke and Smith. I read once where someone was sating that the 20th century would never be forgotten for introducing us to speed, something that any visitor to an amusement park has known the thrill of. Basically what that means is that between the end of the Dark Ages and today there have been only two world views that have gained ascendancy to World Views. Two is a lot and the transition period between is about four hundred years and still it isn’t complete. Everyone in the World today is born into the World View of the Machine Age, plus everyone is also taught values that conflict with the practice of cut throat capitalism, which causes a horrible split that effects us even sexually, what to say of occasioning prejudice. We have lost the straight line. Because of this thousands of young Westerners, both boys and girls embraced Hare Krsna, even while they were actually incapable of believing in such things as swan air planes, demi-gods with four heads etc. The best they could picture was a devil and a hippie with a halo holding a lamb that he had rescued. “Suffer the little children to come unto me.” I was in my mid to late teens when I started chanting Hare Krsna Hare Krsna Krsna Krsna Hare Hare. That was in the sixties when most of the devotees were a few years at least older than me. They were adults to me, many of them, and the few that seemed closer to my own age were not as well educated As was I, nor none at all already the performers of what Aliester Crowly considered to be the most powerful ancient ritual of the West still in extent, the Liber Samek rite which he added to his translation of the Grimiore Lemegeton, or the Book of Evil Spirits. Had I not surrendered then to Krsna whatever it was that came through and attached itself to me and drew off my life force would probably not have weaned and become a nice pet. I call him Asmodeus, but all of this is beside the point. I am not quite sure what your likening of the past deeds of primitive peoples to the to the horrendous crimes by civilized nations has to do with my point that you appear to be contesting, which was that Bhaktivinode Thakur was a realist AND a transcendentalist (could anything be more real?) and that recognizing the existence of RACIST attidudes that he dealt with them most judiciously and in the manner also of a pure devotee and a mahajana. This of course is only speculation upon my part, or is it something growling? Whether the ancient Druids did or did not practice human sacrifice, the modern Druids do not, whereas it cannot been seen that the British Government has made just as much advance, that is if you liken human sacrifice to the systematic starvation of thousands of women and children. I do not. I would much rather have my heart cut out or to be hanged, clubbed, drowned or have my throat slit than I would rather die of starvation, and if that was what it would take to make one of you Krsna conscious, at least there'd be a purpose to it other than in dollars and cents. Within the very last century the British deliberately starved and murdered tens of thousands of South Africaner women and children and collaborated with the Nazi’s for the furtherance of their Empirialist policies and for financial gain. The simple fact of this removes the British Government of then of any claim to a moral upper hand over the ancient “savages” whose sensibilities would have been shocked and offended the primitive cultures that you mention. One sacrifice that the Druids and the Celts have been proven to have performed was the sacrifice of captured wealth, tossing into streams and ponds, returning what was given them to Those who gave them victory, and Who also they recognized as the sole proprietors of the earth. How one could equate the practice of individual and willing sacrifice for the common good to the practice of the murder of multitudes for monetary rewards would be evident to the Druids as ignorance. You simply seem to want to make such a comparison because your arguement is as far as I have seen not existant. Facts attached to soppostions without development of a theory or model do not equal a proposition. You infer that I am wrong, but you do so in order to win your argument (which again is?). You never quite made one, only posted up your dates and the circumstances associated with those dates in order to cast doubts upon my claim that the British Overlords of India were racist, something that British many British commentators freely admit to. And the only reason that you preferred Buddy was because Buddy wasn't talking to you directly and so you could read his posts that you find "interesting". Rest assured I am no less your wellwisher than I was before, not that this is meaningful to you in your estimate. Hari bol What does this say about if not your morality then your emotional and intellectual maturity, and your acceptance of Gaudeya Vedanta philosophy and of even Bhagavan Sri Krsnas Words Themselves. What you are fighting for, you egoism, is not worthy grief and it is certainly not worthy of the sacrifice of your integrity. You have yourself established what means you accept as proving the truth, that being “historical” evidence, only you refuse to accept whatever historical evidence that is offered to you that doesn’t suite your purpose which is to be seen as what? As being a Guru? An authority? Even your little grasp of history is superficial, of the degree that you can get from watching PBS, not even that. I got a better historical education that you seem to possess from reading Classics Illustrated Comic books, and that was by the time I was 7 or 8. I suggest that it is time for you to move on Prabhu, meaning that it is time for you to go back and retrace your steps until you find the moment in which you decided to make of yourself a braying jackass, and when you find that moment of choice again, decide to be something else. You can still be Guru, or Pendragon for that matter, but only for real, no cheating is allowed, or as Lady Day once put it “If you want to sing the Blues you gots ta pay your dues.” Hari bol

Since your so fond of dates: New Years Day, 1924 London Hjalmar Schacht, the new Reich Commissioner for National Currency meets with Montagu Norman, governor of the Bank of England in London. Schacht proposes a collaberation between Great Britian’s World Empire and Germany. Schacht proposes that Norman provide half the capital to a new German credit bank, one that would issue notes in pound sterling. Withing 48 hours Norman not only approves the loan at an exceptionally low interest rate of a flat five percent, but also convinces London bankers to accept bills far in excess of the loan. The goal; of this all was the financing of the rearmamament of Germany in violation of the Versailles Treaty, dangerous, but most profitable to the British financiers. Later in 1934 a select group of London financiers gathered around Norman and it was decided that Hitler had a good future and that he wasn’t just a temporary nightmere to the civilized world as his critics had supposed. Norman convinced his directors of the Bank of England that Hitlers Germany was a great investment and that they could successfully provide Hitler with covert help. One of the major financiers needed very little convincment for he had already read Hitlers book Mien Kamp and approved wholeheartedly. Thus Hitler’s rise to power was financed to a large degree by the British financiers and the mystery of why Hitler did not really consider the British to be his enemies for the longest time is cleared up. Oh, also the Nazi’s took lessons in the Creation of their Concentration Camps by following the example of the British, who earlier around the turn of the century had set up death camps in South Africa in which tens of thousands of women and children were starved to death and allowed to die of disease in order to make the Boers submit. The British invented the Concentration Camp. All of this and more is simply a matter of history, British history, just another few of it’s sterling moments.

Dear Suryaz I certainly had no intention of upsetting you by my comments regarding the mentality of the British Empire. But if you seek to hearken back to an era of true British Nobility, you will have to go back before the Empire to find it. Back before the Normans and even before the Saxons, King Vortergerns henchman. You will have to go back all the way to a time when Britian wasn’t even Britian, but was known by other names, such as Merlin’s Enclosure, and as Ynys Prydein, the last remaining outpost of the Isle of the Mighty. It is therein where the once and future king still sleeps that we may find the glory of our ancestral heritage, not in the later betrayers of that heritage. For you must understand (if you are to understand) that they who betrayed the trust of indigionus peoples everywhere they established their Empire and robbed them of their heritage betrayed also our trust and robbed us of our heritage too. You will have to go back all the way to find it, and anything after that that you accept in it’s stead will be only an imposture. But if you make that journey and when you do find it, then you will find a glorious thing. Then also if you wish you may become an Initiate of that Noble Tradition and take upon yourself the responsibility of bringing it forward, of reviving it, and then of dovetailing it to our Krsna Consciousness movement. Indeed it is so prophesized that this should be so. Virgil in the Fourth Ecologue predicted the appearance of the Golden Age and it’s golden child Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu when he wrote: Now the last great age begun, By Cumae’s seer foretold; New born the mighty cycles run Their course, and quit the old. Now too, the Virgin reappears And Saturn re-controls the spheres. Now is the new race on the way From heaven; do thou befriend The Infant, all but born, whose day The iron brood shall end And with the golden fill the earth. O chaste Lucina, speed his birth Virgil “WHO SHALL BE PENDRAGON IN THE TIME WHEN SATURN SHALL DESEND FROM HIS SPHERE?” Perhaps you? We can come back to this later, for the time being however I would like to address a few points, which moreso than my previous post seem to me to be the origin of your upset. These are specifically related to our World View, or to an internal dissonance created by ones having two world views, one which is conscious, or external, and the other of which is subconscious, or internalized and which is thus the more powerful in it’s influence over us, our perceptions and thoughts. I had wondered at your writing, wondered as to whether to handle it as a question or as a post made not from out of some philosophical justification, some desire to obtain the truth, but rather from an emotional cause with the goal of re-establishing your equilibrium, which the idea of the British Empire as an being an evil empire, seems to have set spinning. You challenge my depiction of the demoniac mentality with “proofs” that suggest that you are neither thinking deeply nor have any great convincement of the slightest truth of our philosophy, your external world view. For instance it is evident from your post that you conclude that history equals progress, that time is linier rather than cyclic and that the Governments of the World are not demoniac and degraded, that they stand on at least truth, things that are all asserted by your internal World View. You are also presuming yourself to be autonomous, a free thinker, liberated rather than conditioned, objective rather than subjective, in position and possession already of the truth. Eloquent speech does not qualify one as a person of integrity, in either an individual or in a country. One’s thoughts, ones words, and ones actions must be above suspicion. That they are not, or that they are not in the case of the British Empire has been already more than just suggested by others posting upon this and the other thread. You do not even challenge your own postulates however after reading all of this. No doubt arises in your mind that you may not be right so then you must be right, at least for you and you must be seen as being right by others. All this reveals you. In the manner established by Sri Jiva for the establishing of the truth one must recognize the doubts that arise from any postulate and then argue strongly against one own postulate upon the strength of those doubts and the evidence provided that they are true. Not to do so and not even to admit to having doubts hardly goes to demonstrate any degree of objectivity. In a person proceeding from a philosophical justification, one who is in actuality searching for the truth; challenging questions arise from such doubts which then compel one to relevant and open inquiry, not only regarding the truth but also of the methodology by which the truth can be established. A simple attempt to provide oneself with the means to continue ones own self delusion that one is situated in the truth with such comforting explanations as that Janus is just a loony or a lie does not evidence any commitmant at all to the truth, to finding it or owning it or serving it. That it is not enough for you to just agree to disagree but that you betray your emotional need by creating another thread just to address my comments is extra evidence to me that you lack both the intellectual and emotional maturity to come to a position where at you are even capable of being honest with yourself, let alone brave enough to face the possibility that the truth that you have such faith in just might be another lie. Tomorrow however is another day. Ys, Bhakta George

>>More scientists disbelieve abiogenesis (life evolved from matter) than believe it.<< >>Actually I think the real scientists there were quite intriqued with the knowledge from the Vedas. They wanted to believe in God, but the Biblical representation of creation as understood by Christian theologians was so very implausible given the physical dating of the universe. etc.<< >>I left unscathed determined never to waste so much time again. There are people who are ready to hear in this world. All-in-all the evolution subject can be classified amongst the species of red herrings. >>The problem in accepting as authorities the scientists whose speculations about the fossils found and not found form the theory of evolution is that so much of the Vedas will now be difficult for your mind to accept. >>>Initially we are all on the mental platform. How can one accept a Satya Yuga, Tretya Yuga or even Lord Ramacandra? Prabhupada said "They are accepting bones as their authority, we are accepting intelligence as ours". That intelligence being the Vedas. It may prove more efficient to accept the Vedas and then see where the scientists have made their hasty conclusions in areas which contradict the Vedic understanding of the way it is. From that more respectful perspective, it is quite easy to become content and actually rise above the 'science' claims.<< >>Soul vision totally absent among subhumans. Comment It really doesn’t matter what scientists believe or disbelieve when they are fattened up and content. Whoever feeds and funds them though cannot be seen to have a very high tolerance for the proposition that there is much profit to be made by relinquishing their higher authority into the hands of competent spiritual authorities. Indeed they do not even believe that there are competent spiritual authorities, not in a spiritual sense for they themselves are entirely confidant of the World View that they preach which is fundamental materialism, the doctrine that allows humanity the profoundest devaluation, into process and product. That is not to say that the mainstream spiritual traditions are not "well" regarded. They are and they have been since the antiquity of European Romanized Christianity when their value as a tool for conquest and repression was first recognized, which first mistranslated the Bible beginning with Genesis 1.24 in order to remove the souls from animals and thus to allow the inhumane treatment of them, otherwise proscribed in Leviticus. Later Augustine amended this doctrine to the position that animals share a group soul. Perhaps his conscience bothered him, but that we will never know. The point is that the mainstream spiritual traditions and scientific disciplines are headed by those who are on the animal platform and who thus, like dogs imprinting whoever is feeding them (or allowing them to continue to exist) as top dog. What they say to you about what they believe personally is entirely different than the position which they support in their work and in their writings, and once such a doctrine as Darwinian evolution has been accepted by the Supreme Spiritual Authority of the West (I discount Protestantism as incoherent past their ability to orchestrate nuclear holocaust and world end in the surface of their fantasy), by the Catholic Church, which it has been, there are no more holdouts, the battle is won, the devaluation of life, all life into simple cogs and wheels, into grist has been made complete. Devotees are no help who are imagining themselves to be: >> Initially we are all on the mental platform.<< >> How can one accept a Satya Yuga, Tretya Yuga or even Lord Ramacandra?<< Devotees imagining themselves to be “off” the mental platform are doing just that, they are "imagining" If you are not liberated, if indeed you still misidentify your material relationships (subtle and gross) with yourself, and please understand that libertion is not a matter of a conceptual understanding, then you are still in May and still on the mental platform. We are all on the mental platform 100% until we are Brahman realized, until that very instant, that is a fact corroborated not only by shastra but by a simple understanding of the science of optics. While material science cannot appreciate the supersubjective realm of transcendence it can explain material situation and relationship, including that of consciousness although it fails to discern what consciousness is the nature of. The laws of optics explain how we are on the mental platform, always, that we are never for a moment in conditioned life off of it. Everything that we see, the sun, the moon, the entire universe appears before us to our conscious perception no where else that we have any perception of it except within our own tiny heads, in our "minds eye" or imagination. All of reality that is non-spiritual that we have any awareness of takes place upon the mental platform. The reason things are heavy and light, sweet or sour, splendid or dull, blue or red has to do with our processes of mentation to a significant degree. One does in fact edit unconsciously what one sees, tastes, touches, etc before one ever has any conscious perception of it. The Vedas teach this, but he Vedas are written in a much more complex language than we speak or write in, but which is proving to be amazingly capable and versatile in it’s ability to translate them, just that most of this type of work has yet to be done and we are paddling against the stream, or swimming against the current generated by fundamental materialism, the accepted doctrine of the Machine Age World View which all of us are born into and so we are left with metaphors, word symbols such as “mental platform” which 99.999 % of Srila Prabhupadas devotees that I have spoken to don’t really have a clue as to the meaning of. Srila Prabhupada agreed with this assessment of his devotees. When one of them was talking about sometimes being in Maya Srila Prabhupada shut him down, asking him whenever was there a time when he wasn’t in Maya? I am not an idle critic which permits my critique, just the amount of persons going around imagining that 1. That they are liberated, no longer in Maya (self identification with the material energies; gross and subtle; i.e the mind) and 2. 2. That they are Vaisnavas, makes me fear and seems also disproportionate to the facts as they have been stated by Guru, Sadhu and Shastra, that liberation is in fact a very rare thing and that a liberated soul acting in Krsna consciousness wasn’t even going to appear until the third generation of his disciples (selective memory?) What hubris, such overweening and asinine pride to think that we just by our good fortune at being allowed the association of Srila Prabhupada and other Vaisnavas would automatically be qualified. Out of many, many thousands of persons some few may actually endeavor for self perfection and yet not only are we imagining that we are liberated, that we are no longer on the mental platform but that we are manjaris or the peacock feather in Krsna’s cap. So progress means that we have to leave off more than our bad habits. Srila Prabhupada said that we were not a society of vegetarians, what to speak of a society of sexual repressives. Concerning the latter, he seemed at times to be quite Freudian seeming to imply that our motivation for doing anything was sexual. Again, this has to do with lack of complexity in our thought rather than a lack of complexity of the English language. That time will come about but until that it does there is no one among us fit to set in the acarya’s chair for the lack of this first of two qualifications (which is why rtvik is authorized until then in regards to the acharya). Individual gurus and followings are autonomous and that is something else, but as far as the acharya is concerned until one is both in fact able to counter and to explain all Vaisnava philosophy not only from a unity of perspective (non-sectarian) but also with a ability to integrate fully our understandings and thus provide us full convincement this lack of ability will produce the same wishy washiness that occaisions such comfortable complacency in the so called Vaisnava camp. Soul vision totally absent among subhumans. To everyone who is functioning as an animal and within the mixed modes of passion and ignorance and whereas some slight glimmer can be seen from the position of situation within the mode of goodness real spiritual cognition awakes only as the soul does.

Evolutionists propose that life evolved from nonlife by change chemical evolution (spontaneous generation). Creationists claim that life comes from life; originally created by an intelligent creator. The facts as they are found in the reaal world is that life comes only from life and that there is simply no way to form complex genetic codes by chance. Evolutionists propose that the fossil record should show that life came about in simple forms originating gradually and that there should be transitional forms linking previous ones. Creationists counter that life as we know it shows that the fossil record exhibits a sudden appearance of complex life in great variety with large gaps separating major kinds. Creationists claim that there are no linking forms. In the real world the fossil record corroborates the Creationists claims, it demonstrates a sudden appearance of a great many different forms of life and that each new kind is separate from previous kinds and that there are no linking forms just plenty of missing links. Evolutionists take the stand that new kinds of life only arose gradually and postulate beginnings of incomplete bones and organs in transitional state. Creationists claim instead that no new kinds of life appeared gradually and that no incomplete bones or organs have ever been found but that those bones and organs that have been found or which have left their impression are formed completely. The fact of the matter as exhibited by the fossil record is that no new kinds of life ever appeared gradually and although there are many varieties none exhibit incompletely formed bones or organs. Evolutionists state that the net result of mutation is beneficial, giant rats and Gila Monsters and the Attack of the 50 ft Woman besides, that beneficial mutation generates new features like and extra set of breasts or perhaps two or three heads (Lord Bhrama is a bit to ambitious for them, they are remarkably shy about revealing to us that what they claim as being truth is in reality their hopeful fantasy that they are not an evolution from primordial slime.) Creationists proclaim that mutation is harmful, even to the fruit fly, to any complex life form and that they further do not result in the generation of any new characteristics. The facts of life as have become known to us through our scientific study of the lowly fly and other complex forms of life and from our observance of the affects of mutating rays and pathogens is that even the smallest mutation is harmful and that larger mutations are fatal and that they never result in anything new. Evolutionists propose that civilizations only arose gradually out from crude and barbaric beginnings. Creationists claim that all falls are falls of Atlantis, that Civilization is contemporaneous with man and that from the beginning it was complex. The facts are that Civilization appears with man. There are millions of Chinese still living in caves now as there were quite a few people still living in caves back then contemporary with civilization. Evolutionists propose that Americans speak the English language but then again they counter their own consideration by saying that language evolved from the simple animal sounds that most Americans are still speaking into complex modern languages such as English. Creationists claim that language is contemporaneous with man and that ancient, or older, or versions of languages as spoken by their namesakes (be it English or DevaNagari) are complex and complete (or more complex and complete as is the case between the English that the English speak and that I as an American rip to pieces and fill up the missing places with gutturals and growls). Reality demonstrates that language is contemporaneous with mankind (not literacy or the written word but language which is independent of the page) and the fact of the matter is apparent to anyone who has ever made a 12 year study of Sanskrit grammer (not me) which is that ancient languages are more complex and modern (and thus ancient thought was also more complex and modern). Evolutionists claim that man appeared millions of years ago as he is today. Creationists claim on the other hand that this miserable idiotic and short lived species began only to appear about 6,000 years ago. The facts are that the oldest written records date from only about 5,000 years ago. The facts of the matter as they appear in the real world debunk evolutionary theory, so why is evolutionary theory still being presented to us as if it were fact? The reason for this is that the present World View is atheistic and demoniac and intends to further degrade us by conditioning us to believe such bs so that we will accept ourselves as being souless machines in a Godless Universe. Thus we will regard ourselves and each other as only flesh to be enjoyed sensually and/or eaten. If life comes from non-life, then man is only a soulless machine and there is no other purpose in life, no ultimate cause except to live to satisfy ones senses. Hari bol

"Leaping to conclusions may provide temporary elation of egos, but it is hardly satisfying." Taxing ones powers of associative reasning can be very difficult. "Jumping to conclusions" is hardly ever satisfying for more than the momentary fraction of relief it provides and should never be done unless existential pressures propel it, such as when you only have a fraction of a second to determine whether it is your life that must be saved or the life of some other person. If ones responsibility is clear then their is no hesitation, if that is one is adequately trained. Still their may be fear. Jumping to conclusions otherwise is a process that has no philosophical justification, it is in fact only a masquerade for a search for the truth. Knowing these things the question arises as to whether we should still search for the truth. What is the truth related to and what is your mission. I say "you" because as you are so found of pointing out I am only a Bhakta of your tradition. I take this to be a supreme compliment, but I wonder if you mean it otherwise. That you are not convinced as you say does not mean that the burden of proof does not exist either way necessarily. Perhaps it is only that you aren't much interested. As you are a disciple of Srila Prabhupada that is in accordance with his instruction if you are only interested in becoming Krsna conscious. That is between you and your Guru and I have nothing more to say to you about it for it is a very personal thing and I do not think that you consider me to be your friend, or anyone who you would feel comfortable confiding your problems to. In reply to your statement concerning the fossil record it was Charles Darwins major gripe when it was brought up to him that the fossil record did not support his theory of evolution, That was then but nothing has changed, it still doesn't, but that wasn't my main point anyway, my point was that we are victims of an educational system that crams all types of crap into our heads as factual information because there is a purpose behind it, that it isn't just accident, and that the major religious institutions of that part of the world that defines reality or the predominant consensual world view have no choice but to accept if they want at all to stay in the game. I am not much interested either, but I am entirely convinced that Krsna consciousness is the greatest attainment, and that thus it should be our only interest. Unfortunately we do not exist in a world that facillitates ones practice of God consciousness and are ourselves responsible for creating it so one must needs be very interested in determining what obstacles can be cleared away, like cleaning out the rubbish in ones own mind before any actual construction can be commenced, or the equipment that one has brought in and which still sets crated up in boxs can be assembled and turned on. I hate having to do research and development at the same time but viewing each individual as the prototype demands it. Anyway good luck Ghari. Hari bol

-- Bhaktivinode Thakur has stated that when one worships his highest ideal one is worshiping Krsna. (Janus) If so, why one should criticize Osama Bin Laden and other fanatics like him? Isn’t he worshiping his highest ideal? Does this kind of worship is the cause of vidya? In fact there is an ocean of difference between the instructions on God-knowledge given by sruti texts and those given by religious cultists. I think that you have answered your own question Satayaraja das, there is also a world of difference between worship of ones highest ideal and idolatry, one being actual worship of God and one being something else, at least that is the only way that I can begin to understand it. Hari bol

GHari, all Please forgive me for the abruptness of the last reply to your post but insurmoutable eternal time and existential pressure compelled it's brevity. I gained through little study to the top 5% in the National Average on my college entrance score so I do appreciate your reasoning, which is quite advanced. I compliment you. To the point of this discussion though Following John Lockes social theory no quarter can be given to any religion that defies "us". Many religions have capitulated, thus providing very little alternative to the acceptance of Darwins theory, not as if it were just a theory, or an unproven, but as it is taught to our innocent children, as if it were factual, not simply a model which Darwin himself admitted was probably wrong, and which he himself recognized as not befitting all the facts. The capitulation of mainstream religion to the Machine Age Materialist World or… View is a neccessity for their survival as powerful institutions, otherwise they would suffer the fate of the millions of nuns and priests that were butchered by the Soviets and by the Red Chinese. For example, the New Catholic Encyclopedia stated in 85 that “General evolution, even of the body of man, seems the most probable scientific account of origins.” This statement seemingly backs up your claim that man was made in the image of a protazoa, an indragopa, rather than it does support the word of Srila Prabhupadas, his claim that man was made not only in Gods image, but as himself a veritable God, a Lord of Creation, as Lord Bhrama, the Creator of the Material Universe. What sense it would make otherwise, to have to evolve from a state in which karma, a material concern cannot be created, through all the species beneath mans dignity, dieing, being born again and again into dumb animal suffering, countlessly, until the bloody moment when we are raised up to any position capable of responsibility beats the heck out of me, but if it is your pleasure to accept it then indeed feel free to do so. How many times can our lust for material enjoyment survive the loss of a spouse or a child, even as an animal? It makes no sense to me, to my perhaps defective way of thinking and it presumes an awful and terrible vision of Krsna, a Krsna as a vengeful and wrathful God, and vengeful towards His devotees, punishing them so terribly. Since Srila Prabhupada claimed otherwise that Krsna gave us this material nature for the purpose of fullfiling as best as could be this desire of ours to be the controller and enjoyer then I must presume that my addled brain has been seized by a more major wit, one without my gift for delinquency from the realms of pure reason and Goloka, and thus assume my theorizing to be correct. To me then such a misconception of Krsna as to make of Him a terrible and vengeful God seems a carry over from our exile to a faith without the Grace of Sri Radha, to a faith without a Goddess, to a terrible mindset that is a product of our conditioning. A religion without a Goddess is halfway to atheism someone has said. No doubt, but an overbalance of masculine values occasioned by the heavy usage of the left hemisphere of the brain makes the conditions worse. It also makes the acceptance at a Vatican meeting of 12 scholars representing the highest scientific body of the Catholic Church of evolution, with the statement “We are convinced that masses of evidence render the application of the concept of evolution to man and OTHER primates beyond serious dispute,” a forgone conclusion. As predictable as a problem of Newtonian mechanics. As one domesticated primate to another then then GHari, What did you think that “In Hoc Signo Vinces” referred to? To the start of a loving relationship? Constantine remained Pagan till his death bed some thirty years beyond his acceptance of Paulian Christianity as the state religion of Rome. What in the heck do you think religion is, religion in the West anyway? "In this sign I conquer." Where does it imply..."and after that I surrender what I have conquered, or reliquish control?" Well, religions certainly no danger, in the perception of those who teach Darwins theory of evolution (and his is only one theory of evolution, but it is the most useful one to those who view the essence of human value in purely materialist terms.) If it had been percieved as a threat Srila Prabhupada would have been thrown into jail by the powers that be or murdered by them, poisoned perhaps (conditioning = sentient programs (in part). Find the cost of freedom, Krsna consciousness is the worst threat to demoniac society that has ever been, and the worst threat to pseudo-religion. Krsna is within you, find Him, find Krsna, your going to need him. Become Krsna conscious and enlighten the world. What price the soul Ghari? My soul, your soul, everybody’s soul? Incalcuable, so then what’s to be done about it? Remove it. What then the value of a human life, of any life without a soul? Dollars and cents, consumption and productivity. Welcome to the New World View. Oh, it's not so new, just go back a few centuries and read Adam Smith and Machiavelli, they sound so contemporary, and so damn familiar (and I used to think that I was autonomous below the paramarthic platform). Go back further, to the isle of Mona, further still. Three thousand years, four thousand years, all so contemporary So Srila Prabhupada said of Christianity, (or of it’s heads rather)what WE have known since before the Burning Times, that it is our worst enemy. We fight spiritual wickedness in high places. Nothing new to us eh prabhu, not to you and I, for we were around during the last two decades, and we were around even before then, so we have some experience, we won't be fooled again eh. Devotion isn’t compelled by what the head knows but what the heart prompts. Bhaktivinode Thakur has stated that when one worships his highest ideal one is worshiping Krsna. Srila Prabhupada was and will remain forever my highest ideal. Srila Prabhupada "as good as God" is God to me, and it is he that my heart compels me to serve, not Krsna. I am not Krsnas devotee. Please forgive my touching upon so many subjects without full exposition of them, much lies behind them that is so, but they are not essential. Foundational to my view of reality is an apparancy, which howsoever dim after so many many years since my fall down still provides other lumanation than this lurid glow affords me. Chant Hare Krsna, serve the devottees and that apparency will encompass you and you will be raised above the tallest mountain tops and you will see beyond the farthest star, all the way up to the point of a new beginning, when the soul awakens, and hopefully beyond. May Krsna hug you. Hari bol May Krsna protect you. Hari bol [This message has been edited by Janus (edited 11-07-2001).]

>>Since Lord Brahma lives for 311 trillion earth years before the whole creation is again retracted, it would likely not be practical to have such a tight pipe on the entry into the cosmos in order to get the innumerable unmanifested jivas eventually situated (but of course with the mathematics of infinity just about anything is possible).<< Obviously GHari. Universe is the sum total of all possibilities. Hare Krsna P.S. But I also read it, perhaps my imagination only read it that way, hard to say as I was only newly born. Hari bol

"The spirit soul when it falls into the material entanglement takes on each of 8,000,000 different forms before arriving at the human form. It begins at the most simple level of life and progressively inhabits one by one through increasing complexities until finally reaching the human form." Hmmm, that's a little bit like I heard Srila Prabhupada explain it, only I heard him say that the first birth that we take in the material universe is not that of the lowliest living entity, but that of Lord Bhrama, the creator of the Universe. I guess that it would be easier to foster self delusion that way, after all there are many peoples who believe that the creator of the material universe is in fact God.

Are the Ritviks Trying to Christianize ISKCON? By Padyavali dasi I refer to the article by Gaurasundara dasa—"The Christians are Ritviks"—on VNN, April 13, 1999. In this article Gaurasundara states: "Is the Christian religion a bad misleading concoction? Should we label them ritivks, a name that should leave a bad taste in our mouths? Well, I don’t know about whether the word rtvik should leave a bad taste in our mouths, but the authors question is a good one, and one that I have been expecting for a long, long time. Hard Rtvikism which seeks to hold Srila Prabhupada up as last achrya and pure devotee is most certainly a copy cat crime, very much similar to that performed by Paul when he created Christianity. Pauls crime was not however the creation of a religion that accepted God-Men and inner or other-world mediation, but the creation of the appearance that there was a continuity between Judaism and Christianity and the misinterpretation of Jesus and his mission. We can get into that later if this thread survives the next few weeks. After I posted the following it lasted just one day on another BB forum before it and myself were both removed for what may be assumed to be crimes far worse than crimes against humanity in the estimate of some. This expectation of mine is that that the words of the acharyas can stand up to close scrutiny as whether or not it may be apparent at the time (and at the time may seem quite the opposite) that they are founded, and furthermore that they communicate the absolute truth. The original thread was started by someone else posting a reply to some person named Gaurasundara dasa’s article. That person was a woman that I served with for a time when I was in the movement some 25 years ago, and as I am quite sentimental about, and attached to my old friends I was looking forward to reading her rely to Gaurasundaras article and offering her any positive feedback that I could to it. I got sidetracked from the question as to whether Rtviks were a Christian type of tradition however due to some points of consideration that Padyavali’s selection of Srila Prabhupdas talks which seemed to me both to make an argument against her own point that she was trying to make, that Rtvikism is unauthorized according to Srila Prabhupada, and to raise the even more important types of questions as I referred to above. Padyavali concludes that Rtviks are all reprobates, that they eat their own snot or some other similar disgusting practices such as illicit sex, meat eating, intoxication, gambling etc., which I personally find just as hard to believe as the counter accusation made by some Rtviks that all Iskcon gurus are also reprobates and engage in the exact same or similar practices. She chose for her “evidence” a parcticular morning lecture given by Srila Prabhupada which did not in fact abrogate Christianity’s validity as a path to perfection, but which affirmed it as such, only decrying it’s leadership as all being hypocrites. I quote Padyavali: Gaurasundara goes on to put down our devotees and leaders in ISKCON as not following Srila Prabhupada while stating that the ministers of the Christian church are the authorized representatives of Lord Jesus because they follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. I would like all of you, our readers, to examine carefully the position Srila Prabhupada takes in regard to the Christians and how they follow Christ's teachings while the (not so subtle) insinuation in comparing ISKCON to Christianity is that ISKCON's system is flawed and does not work so why not change to a system that does. I will add my own remarks after Srila Prabhupada's conversation. Please read carefully as the future of each of us in our movement may depend on our understanding the differences between ISKCON and Christianity clearly. The Pseudo Christians (from "Srila Prabhupada Speaks Out" BTG Vol.20 # 10—a conversation between Srila Prabhupada and some of his disciples during a morning walk in Geneva, June 6, 1974) Srila Prabhupada: Meat-eating is the main barrier to understanding God. The meat-eaters will never be able to understand Him. Disciple: The priest you were talking with last night was a good example. He said to you, "Let us go to higher topics. We've been talking so long about meat eating." Srila Prabhupada: Yes. Disciple: You said, "Well, if you are sinful, it is useless to go onto a higher topic." Srila Prabhupada: Yes. This very fact is stressed in the Srimad-Bhagavatam (10.1.4): "Everyone can understand the Supreme Truth, except the rascals who are meat eaters. Vina Pasughnat; except those who eat meat. Vina means "except," pasu means "animals" and ghnat means "a killer". And so Lord Jesus Christ re-affirmed the Biblical commandment "Thou shalt not kill". You see these so called followers of Jesus Christ were killers from the very beginning. And despite the order of Christ, still they are killing to this day. Srila Prabhupadas argument is based upon his consideration that the Commandment “Thou shalt not kill” encompasses not only human beings, but that it also pertains to animals, most expressly to the killing of animals in order to eat them by human beings, and he goes on to condemn Christians as hypocrites for this very practice. Srila Prabhupadas consideration seems to be that Christians must according to the scripture that they accept be all vegetarians or be accounted as hypocrites for not obeying Gods and Christs commandments not to eat meat. Since the Torah permits the slaughter and consumption of certain kinds of animals, including bulls and cows for human consuption and since the Torah is considered to be God’s Law by the Isrealites or Hebrews of that period, and since nowhere has it been found that Jesus countermanded the instructions of the Torah, as is evident by Gamalials defense of Christs followers and their absolution from guilt before the Sanhedren which would not have been the case had they declared the Torah nullified, Srila Prabhupadas argument cannot be accounted as producing conclusive evidence to back up his claim that all Christian priests and ministers are: These priests and ministers—all of them are hypocritical.. For Srila Prabhupadas claim does not seem to be in accordance with the truth, which is, as mentioned above that the Hebrew Bible and the God of the Hebrew Bible Himself, not only allowed but COMMANDED his people to eat meat. But vina pasu-ghnat, whatever seemingly pious things they may do, those who are animal killers, meat-eaters, can never understand God. It is simply not possible. Now that is the key. But since it is unclear as to what extent anyone of the Hebrew faith or of Christendom through their faith can ever understand God through following their traditions and their traditions permissive attitudes towards the eating of various animals, the question must be whether anyone who is Christian or Jewish can understand God at all. Srila Prabhupada says that they cannot. Since throughout the histories of both these traditions there have been various adherents of them who have claimed some tangible spiritual experience of the Deity to accept Srila Prabhupadas claim is to consider that all of these men and women were either liars or that they were delusional. These "pseudo religious" people think, "We are doing very good work, godly work. We are opening hospitals, building highways, feeding the hungry, and so on. So, what is the difference if we maintain the slaughterhouses and kill fifteen million animals a day? Of course, for some reason that we don't understand, every now and then we end up in ghastly wars wherein we slaughter ourselves and others. But we are happy." These "pseudo religious" people It is quite clear here that Srila Prabhupada considers Christianity “As It Is” TO BE A PSEUDO, or concocted religion. It doesn’t stop there however, but encompasses the followers of the Hebrew faith as well and must also account for Islam, since they all accept the Old Testament and the words claimed to be spoken in it by God as Gods words. Elsewhere Srila Prabhupada has made the claim that the Bible is not transcendental. He has accepted that they may be inspired by God, but it is pretty much evident that he considers the words of God as enunciated in the Bible giving the authority to raise animals and to slaughter them for human consumption to be concocted. These pseudo-religionists also pride themselves on their huge buildings, their big skyscrapers and big factories. But all of this is duskriti industrious rascaldom because it is meant for committing sinful activities, that's all. "Yes," they will say. "We are only after wine, women, gambling and meat-eating—but we are civilized." I found this confrontational “in your face” denunciation of all Christians and Hebrew priests and ministers as “pseudo-religionists” only in intoxication, sex, cheating and gluttony discrediting of the presenter, and his claim made later on that ALL Christian Priests and ministers are hypocrites really set me off, just as much as Srila Narayana Maharajas claim that all Rtviks are poison and the Rtviks claims that all Iskcon gurus are rascals. Being angry makes my mind work, or perhaps not. Disciple: Recently one of your disciples visited Butler, Pennsylvania. While he was there he met a priest who said, "Oh, yes. I remember your spiritual master. In 1965, he was here. He'd just come form India, and he was giving lectures in our church." Srila Prabhupada: Yes. Upon arriving in America, I gave lectures in churches. And what is a church? A church is a place where there are God-conscious persons. Here Srila Prabhupada seems to be contradicting himself. He had just said that meat eaters could not know God, but unless one is imagining that the congregations of these various churches were distinct from their ministry in that they were all vegetarians then we must presume that these “God conscious” people were also inclined towards the same dietary habits practiced by their churches ministry. Thus they were both meat-eaters but they were also conscious of God. Consciousness of something infers some knowledge of the thing that one is conscious of. It does not however presume a comprehensive understanding but only a relative one. Still Srila Prabhupada seems to be contradicting himself, saying that meat eaters are also God conscious, or knowers of God after he has already said that meat eaters couldn’t be God conscious. So I never criticized a church or mosque. Never. Because whatever the group may be, the main thing is they are God conscious—and so they are good. But when they disobey the Lord's commandments, then I must criticize. God conscious meat eaters who are obeying the laws of their religious faiths as enunciated by God in the pages of the Bible which permit them to eat meat and yet Srila Prabhupada is going ahead and criticizing them. Still, I criticize only these rascals: those who set the pattern, those who disobey the commandments out of sheer stubbornness. Otherwise we have no criticism of them. We have no problem. “ “The” commandments? Here it is seeming that Srila Prabhupada if referring to “The Ten Commandments” of which the Commandment “Thou shalt not kill” is beneath in sequence and order of importance the second and third Commandment which prohibit the making of images and the worship of them. Irregardless of any explanations to the contrary, educated Christians reading this morning lecture by Srila Prabhupada, and who recognize that we do both make and worship images of things that are in heaven, view this practice as idolatry, and have no choice but to see that Srila Prabhupada is doubly guilty of hypocracy, first for pretending that he accepts the Ten Commandments as Gods Laws, when it is obvious that he doesn’t by his violation of the second and third Commandments (at least), and second by his inept attempt at the usages of words jugglery in an attempt to turn Christian congregations against their ministers and priests by claiming that they do not follow the Ten Commandments when he doesn’t either. Padyavali expected her argument to explain Srila Prabhupadas views and understanding of Christianity to our discernment. I am not hopelessly confused, already I have been able to figure out a few things, but some of the things that I have “realized” preclude the acceptance of this particular talk by Srila Prabhupada as any weight of evidence against either the Rtviks or the Christians as being concocted religions due to the seeming contradictions made is Srila Prabhupadas statements, including this: So many people have asked me, "Do you value Christianity?" "Yes," I say. "If you faithfully follow your Christian religion, you will become perfect." In this statement Srila Prabhupada is claiming that if one faithfully follows Christianity, a tradition which, like that of the rtviks, accepts a guru that is not physically present as the only mediator needed, that one will become perfect. Padyavalis use of it therefore only goes against her point that Rtvikism and Christianity are concocted. Disciple: So then do Christians still need people to give them spiritual guidance? Srila Prabhupada: Surely. Their Priests and ministers DO NOT, CANNOT, GUIDE AND UPLIFT THEM. THE PRIESTS AND MINISTERS ARE THEMSELVES FALLEN. Otherwise, the Christian religion is very nice, IF SIMPLY THE PEOPLE HAVE SPIRITUAL GUIDES TO HELP THEM TO FOLLOW IT PERFECTLY. Here it appears to me that Srila Prabhupada is presenting the conclusion of his argument, which “simply” speaking is that the whole of Christiandom, Judaism, (and lets throw in Islam since all three admit to a faith in the same God of the Old Testament) should surrender to someone who understands their religion better than they. This can be extended to the Rtviks, to ISKCON, etc., to any religion whose priests and ministers are hypocrites for not following the instructions of spiritual guides who can actually uplift them. Who could they be? Disciple: We are not sectarian. Srila Prabhupada: Why should we be? God is one. Evidently not if on the one hand the God of the Bible permits animals to be killed and eaten and the God of the Krsna consciousness movement does not, or…The God of the Bible is not God but someone speaking “for” God and attributing his own words to God. We go back at this point to Srila Prabhupadas claim that the Bible isn’t Vedic literature, or eternal transcendental truth, that it may be “inspired” of God but that it is not breathed out by God. Obviously he feels that he has the authority to pick and choose which of the Laws of God pertain to humanity and which do not and how they should be interpreted over and above all of the Christian priesthood and ministry. Is he consciously aware of this? Why should we be sectarian? Each person, according to his own particular cultural background and circumstances, is praying to God. That is one of the forms of Bhakti, or devotional service to God. Disciple: Many of the young people now—they may look to the Bible for instruction but they stay away from the priests and the ministers. They feel they are hypocritical. Srila Prabhupada: They are hypocritical. Simply hypocritical. These priests and ministers—all of them are hypocritical. Getting big fat salaries, drinking wine and eating killed animals. And when you remind them "Thou shalt not kill" they say "Let us go on to higher topics." -all of them are hypocritical” This claim by Srila Prabhupada that all Christian priests and ministers are hypocritical seems to fly in the face of Biblical evidence that they are simply following the orders of God which includes eating meat, fish, etc., His portrayal of them as all being all hypocritical rests upon evidence that not only simply isn’t there but which turns around and disproves his consideration that the killing of animals for food is the type of killing that God was referring to in his commandment not to kill. What is obvious is that he is attempting is to eliminate the middlemen of Christianity and to replace them with those who understand God, or who understand God as he does, which includes an understanding that the words and even the Commndments of the God of Judaism and of Christianity are no longer relevant, even assuming if in fact they ever were, and that those in his position are factually free to do in effect what Thomas Jefferson used to do to the Bible with a pen knife, which was to excise or cut out any words that his conscience could not attribute to God. Still to most Christians who are familiar with their Bible it appears that Srila Prabhupada wasn't. To devotees who do not consider that the Pure Devotee of Krsna can be guilty of making assumptions it still seems (upon familiarizing oneself with the Bible) that Srila Prabhupada is not basing his arguements upon the Bible as Shastra, but upon some higher authority (he sites the Vedas rather than the Bible specifically) that allows him authority over even the Bible itself and thus to the Christians, Jews and Moslems over even God's own words, over God himself. That is bad enough in their eyes, but that is not "worse". What is worse is his appearance of a lack of integrity, or of a simple foolishness. If Srila Prabhupada was conversant with the Bible then he was aware that the Bible permitted eating meat, and if he was not then ... Sorry folks but I still have a problem with "Asvatama is dead...that elephant" and I know for a fact that there are Christian Priests and ministers who are sincere and devout. Implying that ALL are addicted to intoxication, sex, etc., or that none of them are sincere burns me up, so much so that I am not really interested into reconciling the apparent contradictions and establishing a validity to Srila Prabhupadas disciples claims that he is a divine authority. Unfortunately I have my own personal experiences which have demonstrated to me that Srila Prabhupada was an ocean of mercy, for he elevated me to the plane of transcendence at which occaision I had the direct experience of eternity, of my own immortality and at that time could see clearly. That and my own conditioning doesn't leave me much choice. All my ducks must be in line. Hari bol [This message has been edited by Janus (edited 11-05-2001).]

Oh, I don't know, I just got blasted off of another Vaisnava forum site for defending the Christian ministry against the accusation that they were all hypocrites because some one thought that it was against their religion to eat meat and that thust they were violating the commandmant "Thou shalt not kill." Had the author of that condemnation bothered himself to flip a few pages over and read those portions of Deutoronomy in which Jehovah is instructing his faithful to eat meat, fish, etc., he might have realized that his arguement and condemnation were not in touch with the reality of the situation... but he didn't, and since it was Srila Prabhupada who made the claim and condemnation, even though it is quite obvious that he was wrong and out of line and even rather boorish is condeming all Christian ministers hypocrites as Nietche pointed out "people do not want challenging questions, they want comforting explanations", so the entire thread which was started by someone else, and which had to do with something else got pulled and the moderator is all aglow with himselg, falsely imagining that he's won one for the gipper.

[This message has been edited by Janus (edited 10-27-2001).] [This message has been edited by Janus (edited 10-27-2001).]

Bring me my bow of burnished gold...Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare. Bring me my Chariot of Fire. Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare. Hare Krsna prabhu's "Thus in a certain sense we "make the fact. That is to say, beginning with immediate perception of an actual situation, we develop the fact by giving it further order, form and structure (we code it into our emic reality (R.a.w.)....In classical physics, the fact was "made" in terms of the order pf planetary objects...In general relativity, the fact was "made" in terms of the order of Reimannian geometry...In quantum theory, the fact was "made" in terms of the order of energy levels, quantum numbers, symetry groups, etc. Dr. David Bohm - Wholeness and the Implicate Order, Ark Paperbacks, London, 1983, p.142 The arguement proposes no construction, just "Oh, just see that this is copied from that." But what is the Guru's claim? "I am not saying anything different." What is night for the conditioned soul is daybreak...I am the sound in ether, the original fragrance of the earth. and from the topmost planetary system down to the lowest, all are places of misery. The line continues so what the accusation that the same truth is enunciated. "Yes, I am copying Zoroaster." What is your point? It is a metaphysic. It is non-sectarian Prabhu. One should abmit that there is mystery. "Now I a fourfold vision see, And a fourfold vision is given to me; Tis fourfold vision in my supreme delight And threefold in soft Beulah's night And twofold always. May God keep From single vision & Newton's sleep. Blake If there is any problem with copying it is only notable in the copyists error. Where is the comment that the "copyest" Srila Prabhupada has copied something wrong? Perhaps Sri Krsna didn't get it, perhaps there is something much more valuable in this material natute than the touch of Srimati Rahdharani's bosom against His lotus feet? Even "domesticated" primates have their limitations prabhu. Toss me another bannana so that I don't have to overbalance myself and reach to far out from my perch atop the counter. I consider that Srila Prabhupadas ability to even master Srila Sankaracharyas atheistic Vedanta in Sri Krsna's service is worthy of tossing my graduation cap up three thousand feet into the air, but all you see is "I heard it before somewhere." Yeah, I bet ya did, probably not in Pharsee, or Persian, or in Sanskrit though I'll bet. Why didn't we take to it then? Some of us did. What were you doing when you were 11, 12, or 10? According to time and place. You adjust your presenation. Oh no, not us, we have merely to repeat, not even to be copyests, all we must do is repeat, repeat exactly, hoping all the time that someone will just listen to us out of what? Out of pity? " "In this thread we are discussing two points raised by Audarya lila while quoting your Prabhupada’s precepts: “ ‘spiritual life looks miserable’ & 'material life and all material paraphenalia are like so many zeros’ “ "We said that these points are not but plagiarism from Zoroastrian’s doctrine and from Sankara’s Mayavada. Not any ‘original’ Krsna-conscience as he postulates to present." Ah, so Zoaraster wasn't repeating anything. He was in fact the originator of at least this point of "imperishable science." I feel worse than vultures tearing at my flesh when I hear such stupidity presented as "discussion" "Can you refute my argument or only make some vitanda?" Your reasoning doesn't even take into account a basic understanding of Sri Krsna's most obvious statements. Guru is One, and nescience? Why nest to Sri Sri Radha Krsna Nescience is allmighty prabhu. Srila Prabhupada presented Krsna Consciouness...to us...according to time, and to space and to capacity. This is there, can it be used in Krishna's service? So you you should see that you have your bone and that you are welcome to gnaw upon the meatless dirty old thing until the cows come home, but do not allow yourself to be victim to anymore bad ideas prabhu. Examine eacxh thought that you think to consider whether you are the originator of it or not so that we may say of you that you are at least not lazy in your bad habits. Hari bol

Originally posted by Satyaraja dasa: With all due respect, your continued nonsensical posts meant to demean and discredit Gaudiya Vaishnavism only serve to demean and discredit your own good self. (Audarya lila) Gaudiya-vaisnavas are proselytizing all over the world. For certain they should expect some reactions besides humble reverences. Here we are in a discussion forum and we are free to discuss the philosophical tenants that you had pointed out. So, defend your own points if you can by direct refuting your opponents’ arguments. Some really may find great pleasure in trying to discridit all that they had held as true when they were a 'Gaudiya Vaishanava' as they had noticed that these ‘truths’ were but concoctions and fallacies without any serious basis. -- Surely feeling gleeful while aware of others' misfortune and delighting in provocation is not the way of a devotee or a medical doctor, Satyaraja das prabhu. Please try and accept this as brotherly concern from one who often finds himself equally afflicted. valaya RR Certainly it is not a mature perspective, so certainly it isn't deeply philosophical, and so it isn't human. Prabhupada said that a person without a philosophy was an animal. What does that mean? And if the rejection is animal was the acceptance human? The animalistic acceptance of Krsna consciousness may display a superficial acceptance of the philosophy but the actual impetus that occaisions ones acceptance and superficial display is occaisioned by weak biological imperatives. It was not an acceptance occasioned by a search for the Absolute Truth but was a search for culture, for somehing to make up for the lack of instinct. It can be a fear response, or it can be a desire to acquire that which facillitates ones material acquisitioning of power, prestege, socio-economic advancement, or the bolstering of a passionate sense of false identity, of the type that is common to anyone entering into any messianic type of religion that sees itself and it's adherents as saviors of the world, or any combination of these. It can be "lust only", and thus the ignorance displayed by the persons being mentioned are in accordance with Bhagavad Gita and Lord Sri Krsna; predictable results. Looking at it from the perspective of existential psychology there is considerable involvement of what Srila Prabhupada refered to as "Cheating propensity" and "tendency towards becoming self delusional" in such a perspective. The type of control that one expected was not attained, and rather than examining ones own self and ones own expectations to see if they were ever really appropriate to the paradigm being offered, one tends to blame and to imagine that one is being objective, to "tighten" ones control that "slipped" so badly as to allow one to have ever had accepted what one is now positing to be preposterous. Were one to react differently and examine onesself and ones assumptions there would be nothing in the way of coming finally to the position of relevant inquiry, a position only imagined before. But that would be human. P.S. The lack of self examination and self honesty can be seen as evidenced by the inabilty of said persons to refute the major postulates of Gaudiya Vedanta. Take just the "aham Bhramasmi" issue. What can they say, that they are not spirit soul, that their experiences in Krsna consciousness has proved this to them? No. The best that they could come up with would be to be human for a moment and to make from thence the claim that Krsna Consciousness failed to provide them with a paradigm by which their position as spirit souls could be realized, as it claims that it is able to to. Then however they would be subject again to self critique, to the numerous and self challenging questions of "Did you do?Were you?" Etc., and they realize then that they would have the Vaisnava literatures to contend with and that these would suffice to discredit their claims of objectivity and would reveal their insincerity, or their error. This is a particularly hard line exposition and fosters a misunderstanding due to the conjectures and assumptions that one may make due to a lack of more detailed exposition. To partly adjust for this suffice to say that quite a few are not aware of their dishonesty, or that their motivations for becoming devoties in the first place were material, or derived from an emotional impetus rather than from a philosophical imperative. Hari bol [This message has been edited by Janus (edited 10-27-2001).] [This message has been edited by Janus (edited 10-27-2001).]

>>>The very word "Krsna" means all-attractive, but Radharani is so great that she attracts even Krsna.If Krsna is always attractive to everyone,and Radharani is attractive to Krsna,how can we imagine the position of Srimati Radharani? We should try humbly to understand and offer Her our obeisances,saying,"Radharani,you are so dear to Krsna.You are the daughter of King Vrsabhanu and You are Krsna's beloved.We offer our respectful obeisances unto You." Radharani is very dear to Krsna and if we approach Krsna through the mercy of Radharani,we can easily attain Him.If Radharani recommends a devotee,Krsna immediately accepts him,however foolish he may be.Consequently in Vrndavana,we find devotees calling, "Jaya Radhe." We should be more interested in worshipping Radharani,for however fallen we may be,if somehow or other we can please Her,we can very easily understand Krsna. (Elevation to Krsna Consciousness by His Divine Grace A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Chapter Five: Knowing Krsna's Energies) [This message has been edited by leyh (edited 10-22-2001).] Thank you leyh Of course their isn't much that I can add to that, except that the idea of worshiping the Divine Feminine, is, due to our conditioning and propensity towards mysogyny quite repugnant to many men. Just witness the extreme disrespect towards women that was exhibited in ISKCON in the past. The question really is if those who are worshipping Krsna but continueing their mysogynistic attitudes and behaviour, and corresponding contempt for the feminine values of nurturing, etc., are in fact actually worshiping Krsna at all, or whether they are instead simply trying to attach their own bad values to Krsna and are thus only worshiping an image of Krsna that they have created, but which doesn't "stick", which would explain their profound lack of spiritual advance and vantage. Thank you for your reply, most appropriate and has got me to thinking. Hare Krsna, Hari bol

Saxon words for bofy functions are "dirtier" than Norman words because of a plurality of puritan-economic-racial prejudices that comprise a factor of our conditioning. Or to explain this a bit more simply when the Normans invaded Saxon England, taking it over, they became the Lords and rich from their plundering. To be a Saxon then was to be a member of a poor and conquered underclass, to be vile, or a villian (property-less), so Saxon words, or Saxon language is the language of the vulgar, amazing isn't it? Just an interesting comment that I read somewhere and felt appropriate to post in consideration of the slant that the thread has taken. Are Saxon words in actuality "dirtier" than Norman words? Of course not, but they are esteemed to be so due to our conditioning, which is obviously invisible but yet still acts upon us. What in fact then are "dirty" words (and do they even exist? Perhaps we, as devotees need a new definition, and perhaps we even allready have one. What do you all think? Hari bol

"His other children? You are now one of his children? His children do not defy him, especially by trying to jump over his head and claim an independent relationship with the Supreme Lord and/or His Eternal Consort." An "independent relationship with the Supreme Lord and/or His Eternal Consort." "Every Bhramachari should fall in love with Srimati Rahdarani" - Srila Prabhupada One of the greatest mysteries the love between a maiden and a man, or so a great mystic once had said. I do not see though that Srila Prabhupada is implying in the quote that any bhrmachari should confide, or go through him in order to achieve that "falling in love". Indeed the inference appears to me to be that one should just try to fall in love with Srimati Radharani, and that the only qualification that this love must have in order for it to become one of one's greatest, if not THE greatest asset in promoting ones Krsna Consciousness is for this love that one has for Krsna's Srimati Radhrani is for this love to be real. "You haven't even begun your spiritual life, yet you are so puffed up and arrogant that you believe yourself to have something to offer others. Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the farest of them all? "You are so puffed up and arrogant" Look at yourself in the mirror. Such arrogance and so puffed up. "Your spiritual life hasn't even begun yet." Your love is not real? You are sahajia. You promote yourself all the way up to blindness Mdd, to the position of an absolute authority "Your spiritual life hasn't even begun yet." Because you were not there for what? The kiss? And you seem to me to be the cheapener, you the sahajia, you whose love perhaps is only a display. Perhaps you are convinced that you are the gaurdian of devotion, that no one comes to the father, or to Srila Prabhupada, or to Lord Krsna or Srimati Rahdarani except through you, or with you watching with judicious eye for each hint of hope, each moment of sincerity, so that when such a thing appears you can quickly trample it so it will never have a chance to grow and appear as something colorful blooming and beautiful in appearance in that grey and barren wasteland that by what you say of others must be your own soul. "Spiritual life begins at initiation, whether that initiation be via fire sacrifice or any other mystical means, but only an offender would claim a transcendent relationship without said initiation in humility at the lotus feet of guru." "Mystical" From the Greek word "Mytikos" which means "to quite the senses and enter...Within". Can you see inside me? Every corner, eyvery inch? Have you sieved and sifted every grain of me? Were you there when Srila Prabhupada did? No? Do you command his approval? Does Lord Krsna come at your every call, cater to your every whim? Or do you too have some inner cavity, some rotting of the soul that causes you to call outward in your hatred and your agony like this? " Guru is not an imperson. Srila Prabhupada is the guru, the person, for love of whom the Deities have been pleased to grace the rest of us with Their darshan in his established temples. Only through him can you know Radharani." Not according to Srila Prabhupada. "Therefore your claim of intimacy is false, and such a false claim is evil." Taking Srila Prabhupadas suggestion that one should fall in love with Srimati Radharani is evil by your reasoning, and thus I cannot account you to be anything except a blinded soul. O.K., so enough is enough. You want to tar and feather someone start with yourself. You want to debate, lets see what you got, so far you havn't changed anyones mind, so far you havn't defended Srila Prabhupada, just cited yourself as another example of someone who can't. Hari bol

"Actually there is hardly any discussion on the net trying to establish Chaitanya's avatara from the shruti. Basically it is only one guy from Brazil." Ah, the boy from Brazil. Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu the hidden avatar. People are not inclined to challenge their beliefs. To insist upon them, that they be real brings up our subjective nature. Many people live on hope in their faiths and that provides them well enough with a constitution strong enough to suffer through their infirmities of youthfullness and old age. It is the belief of some that the onset of the Golden Age will eradicate an ages old condition of ignorance, and some others that Kali yuga shall halt it's advance not just for the promissed 10,000 years of the new order, but for the entire duration of this cycle of Bhramas...what is it, day or breath? I am sorry but I do not remember which. The point is; is that it is not so surprising that though many people of the strongest convincment of faith accept only on faith that which remains to be unproven to them is not at all surprising, it is expected. We can account for this simply by self examination. To demonstrate the proof of evidence perhaps only requires an explanation that is not at the time forthcoming simply because the need for it is just developing. Our understanding should increase if what Krsna Consciousness promisses is proved to us through our own experiences. Perhaps the New Man will be as far above us in it's capacity understanding than we are from the apes and the demigods are from us. That even one man is challenging is something.

"Cheers" Elephants play, lions play, in fact there isn't a single animal that does not, excepting one. "To be." From a Sanskrit root. "Or not to be?" The original meaning of "To be", meant to be alone and lost. "Not to be" meant of course then to be no longer alone, no longer lost, to become again embroiled in the doings of society. It didn't mean to die then, it meant something else, something much, much, more horrible, it meant to be alone with ones self, to be alone with ones self even in the forest. quote: -- In that stage, we may be warned not to mix with the Mayavadis, Buddhists, Sankarites, Naga babas, and so many other groups of so-called sadhus.... -- and, quote: -- This caution is valuable in the beginning, because there are so many cheaters who want to devour us. At that stage, especially, to help us proceed towards the goal, we must exclusively concentrate on our guru, avoiding the Buddhists, mayavadis, atheists, and all those who wear red rags in the name of sadhus... -- >>>Terrific ! Now I have something.<<< Yes, from loneliness and isolation, from astrangement come madness, and from the association with the persons mentioned what proposal for solution can be obtained to do away wth ones pain and loneliness? Death. Kill yourself or get more and more lost, more and more maddened, become a ghost. "The below description is just to give people an idea that two can play this game. It is not a game because you are playing it with yourself, drifing off into the "Real" Universe and becoming hypnotized, by Mayavadi, or Bhuddhist, or Atheist, or some other reality tunnel, which can only at best devour you. "If people get mad while reading the below description, it is recommended they stop, read the above material in quotes and then continue. That is the seed." So you have found your bhija mantra. *** >>All those who wish to progress spiritually will do good to staunchly avoid the so-called Acharyas of the Gaudiya vaishnava line, who with their two-bit scholarship sit in judgement of sadhus of other lines, by calling them so-called sadhus.<< That can be accepted as an accurate generalization of some, but not all. Q: Why are the others, "so-called" sadhus? A: Because they are not Gaudiyas, period. Nonsense! Because they preach that there is no self, that you are an illusion, that all is suffering so why not just end it all, or that although there is a spirit, it has no sistinction, no relationship upon the ultimate level, no love, etc., etc., etc. "To continue, good association brings spiritual progress as recommended in many scriptures. Obviously, people who are interested in promoting themselves by putting down others, do not qualify as good association, but come under the category of "bad association" which is the case with the GV Gurus." Another generalization that is acceptable when one considers that they are just lower to at best middle class devotees. The simple modus operandi used by tricksters, is as follows, 1. Go to a foreign country, and find a set of people who have no inkling of what Hinduism or Indian history is. Who have no inkling of what God is, of who they are, or of their relationship with him, which can be revived even while they live. Go upon the order of your spiritual master to give them Krsna. 2. Entice them with flowery [but false] descriptions of Hinduism, vedic religion, vedic scriptures(*) and drill in the idea that they are the only true genuine spiritual people in India. The rest are all trash. How proud he was of them, of the people of India, and of the souls surrendered to Krsna, even in the least of all ways, offering all encouragment and only disclaiming the hypocrites and the predators. 3. Give them a comic book version of Indian history. Like Moses parting the Red Sea, like Noah and the flood? That you had to take literally because since Hesiod there has been a steady emptying of mythos of the divine. When did he ever tell you that Krsna wasn't divine, or that Krsna's pastimes wern't transcendental? 4. Give them non-existent concepts, such as, service to Krishna, prema, rasa, etc, etc, all conjured out of the hats of the GV Acharyas. Christ spoke of prema, and his rasa was evident, etc., etc., etc., to all of your charges. Service to Krsna is the greatest service to the self, not because only Krsna can save anyone, but because through pleasing Krsna Krsna reciprocates, Krsna pleases you by letting you experience Krsna, by allowing you to be able to, not with your own limited capacity, but through His limitless ability which can allow you to know Krsna completely, as He is. With our limited capacity we cannot even recieve all the beauty of the world, but through Krsna's ability we can see all of Him. "There is no danger here, because the foreigners have nothing to compare this with and are in no position to find out if it is true or false. They will swallow it, hook, line and sink. And then they will be lifted up to beyond the farthest star, to a world wherin no suffering exists, to eternity, knowledge and bliss, and this all may happen even while they live. 5. Once again, drill into their heads that GV is the only true interpretation of Sanathana dharma (This point has to be repeated at regular intervals, until it sinks in). And voila ! Another brainwashed individual joins the bandwagon." Yes, and begins the road back home, back to Godhead. And in that effort there is no loss or dimunition. "It is evident that there are plenty of crooks and phoneys, posing as sadhus out there, who are as spiritual as a stone wall. Hence, people who wish to find a genuine spiritual Guru, should use the Gaudiya Gurus as a model for what a Guru should not be. Some, but not all, and certainly not any of the acharyas in our line. * Hinduism - Gaudiya Vaishnavism + the rest of the false philosophies in India. Vedic religion - GV, of course. (was there any doubt?) Vedic literature - Any literature written by GV Gurus, and some older literature endorsed by the GV Gurus. Cheers I don't give two hoots about what ISKCON thinks, but your implication that Srila Prabhupada was a cheater is intolerable. Do you really believe that he wasn't absolutely sincere? If so you don't know what sincerity is.

In many ancient cultures a womans virginity wasn't calculated from the time that her hymen was penetrated by the phallus of a male, but from the distance of her moon period. Thus a woman was considered to be a virgin after each menstrual flow had taken place. I detect a note of "sex is dirty" in some of the replies upon this thread, and a corresponding hatred of nature, of the natural, not to mention a "holier than thou attitude". Yes, most people who believe in the Virgin Mary will believe anything presented dogmatically within the faith that they have accepted, just as quite a few people will accept quite literally that there are elephants in Hell, etc., who have also accepted that the universe was created by a humanoid (appearing) life form with four heads who sprouted out of the belly button of a Supreme Being floating around on an ocean on back of a snake with a million heads. Mythos as we are conditioned to regard it is considered to be empty of content, this is far from the case however, not that we understand this, still going around trying to convince ourselves that we really do believe that it is literally true. A question that I always flumox Christians with is whether God is male. Falling into my trap they reply that he is, at which point I ask then whether God has a penis. Most fall over dead or cross themselves and walk backwards out of the room quickly. Those who however survive this great shock can be led around to the question as to whether or not, if God indeed did sire Jesus as to whether there might have been any intamacy involved, whether he and Mary both enjoyed the conceptual act or whether it was all quite surgical and devoid in its intirity of any conjugal love. Anyway Bhudha was "gat" upon his mother by a white elephant the story goes. Try introducing literality to that. Hare Krsna

>>>I volunteer to do the first yanking, Bhakta George/Whyspery. You're intoxicated. Got to be, to be talking like this. We don't need your wishywashy catering to whoever flatters you kind of help.<<< Gopal Earlier in response to another post of mine you said that it was a great post, but here you catergorize my posts as wishy washy, and catering to whoever flatters me. This leads to the logical conclusion that you regard only wishy washy posts as being great, or that you can't make up your mind, or that since I did not reply to your flattering comment issued previously with comment regarding your posts in kind, praising your alacrity, articulation, style of font etc, that you felt slighted, and that thus you are trying to take back your original praise or trying to punish me for not praising you. Sorry, I am so attached to praise and so much seeking it that I do not usually respond to those praising me. What I take offense to though, is your speaking as "We". Do you have a tape worm or some other parasite with whom you have formed a symbiotic relationship with that entitles you to speak as "We". If so might I ask you which, the worm or yourself is the dominant half of the realtionship. Never mind which you think is the most intelligent, it is obvious to me. I totally reject your conciet that you are at all qualified to speak for the community, as well as your estimate, either favorable or unfavorable to my postings except as how they help or do not help you. Since an ealier posting of mine was described as being great by you (although without comment in regaurds to what you considered to be great) I would hope that you recieved some benifit from it, one that you recognized, and not that it was (as some believe) a subtle attempt at acquistion for the purpose of manipulation. Likewise your latest post does not take acception to any point in the posts, does not argue against any postulate, only suggest that I am not in my right mind, or normal, or "clearly objective." You only affirm the truth of my posts in that here there is evidence that you are considering yourself more objectine and have drifted off into your "Real Universe" in which your esteem by others upon this forum figures as your most pressing interest. In truth though I did consider editing that and ony portion of my posting that you commented on out of the postings, and that part only as it is mystifying. Even if one had seen both the movies When Worlds Collide and The Day the Earth Stood Still how many had read the short story "Farewell to the Master" which has a shocking twist at the ending that isn't contained in the movie, and more importantly how many would have caught that what I was really alluding to was the clash of world views and the ability on reason to triumph over madness? I am far from perfect and have many, many faults but I do not consider that the clearer portions of my posts which are the most instructive do not present understandings which are extremely benificial. Everyone is needed. Indeed I consider them essential. That you do not, or that you sometimes think that this ones posts are great and sometimes wishy washy I have no objection to, for I agree with that assesment in regards to my imput on these forums.But That you forget or conveniantly exclude the fact that on this thread you have previously complemented my post as great and seek now to create the belief that they are all wishy washy and unneeded I take acception to. That you accompany your denunciation with "We" has however got me seathing. I hate people who try to mold public opinion for the purpose of satisfying some petty desire for false ego agrandizment or for any other reason other than for their benifit and only then with their knowledge and permission. Every individual has not only the ability and right to think for themselves but the obligation to do so and Lord Sri Krsna in the 13th and 14th chapters of Bhagavad Gita makes it quite clear that unless each individual does so they won't advance. So I am sure that Lord Krsnas words are true, that we can elevate ourselves trough our minds and that is what these posts, or the most of them are dedicated to doing.